Talk:Ontario Highway 73/GA1
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 03:16, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Nominator: Floydian τ ¢
Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have my full review up shortly. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 03:16, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
1: Well-written
- a. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors: .
- b. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Done
|
Done
|
Check for WP:WTW: None
Check for WP:EMBED: Done
- The table is standard in such articles. Checked other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416
2: Verifiable with no original research
- a. Has an appropriate reference section: Yes
- b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: very good Checked other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416
Done
|
Done
Check for inline citations WP:MINREF: Done
|
- c. No original research: Done
Done
|
3: Broad in its coverage
a. Major aspects:
|
---|
Done
Not all sources are accessible. Cross-checked with other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416. Random check on accessible sources - Source 2 & 4
|
b. Focused:
|
---|
Done
|
4: Neutral
Done
4. Fair representation without bias: Done
|
5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes
6: Images Done (PD) (Cross-checked with other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416.)
Images:
|
---|
Done
6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: Done
6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: Done
|
As per the above checklist, the issues are:
Fix short paragraphs.
This article is a very promising GA nominee. I'm delighted to see your work here. I'm putting the article on hold. All the best! --Seabuckthorn ♥ 03:54, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks again for taking on my spamming of GAN :) I'm not sure which paragraph(s) in particular stand out... I could combine the paragraphs in the RD, but generally speaking I find the description of the route a separate idea from the "and today it is known as..." thought. - Floydian τ ¢ 06:26, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- Well, that's not spamming. That's your hard work and humility. The names and content of these articles may be similar, but the geographical location and purpose of these highways are different. I'm sure I won't need a tourist guide now to navigate roads in Ontario, if I ever happen to visit the place :).
- Apologies. I kind of missed that fact. Feel free to revert it. Thanks for your polite explanation. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 16:02, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks again for taking on my spamming of GAN :) I'm not sure which paragraph(s) in particular stand out... I could combine the paragraphs in the RD, but generally speaking I find the description of the route a separate idea from the "and today it is known as..." thought. - Floydian τ ¢ 06:26, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
OK, everything looks good now. Passing the article to GA status. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 16:02, 13 January 2014 (UTC)